tv Prime Ministers Questions From the British House of Commons CSPAN September 14, 2016 7:30am-8:01am EDT
should be considered and local concerns taken into account. i understand there's a meeting later this month. i hope my honorable friend will make views known at that meeting. >> tomorrow i will be help to go launch a program, the engineering program in my contingency to boost the interest to 14 to 16-year-olds in engineering skills. would the prime minister would like to join me in congratulating but would she take it from me that her words of congratulations would mean rather more if they were not accompanied by 30 and 50% in apprenticeship funding, a program which the institute has described as -- i simply don't
recognize the situation he set out in relation to apprenticeship. we have seen 2 million apprenticeships created over the last six years. we are committed to the government seeing more apprenticeship being created. that's giving young people opportunities, people i met to learn a skill, to get into a job, to get into the workplace, to get on where their talents will take them. [shouting] >> does the prime minister agree that lives of many children particularly in our poorest areas are limited to living in unstable households and would she look at the children center group which recommends other solutions to this issue? >> thank you, thank you, can i say to my honorable friend on
the work she's doing on the parliamentary group, the question is about stable background, family background that young people, it's obviously an important issue and she has been a champion for family and family life. can i say to her that i have set up a policy route led by my friend and i'm sure i will ask him to look carefully at the report coming out of the parliament group and to see what we can take from that. >> alex cunningham. >> thank you, mr. speaker. potential to create jobs and save country billions of pounds and play role. ccs is critical to, so can the prime minister tell the house when the it will publish new strategy? >> thank you, thank you.
can i first of all say that the issue of climate change and reducing omissions and energy policy are very important to this government. we have a fine record in this area and we will be continuing to do that. but on the issue of carbon capture and storage, this has been looked at carefully in the past. it's one of the key issues around this is the cost. we will continue to invest in the development of ccs, we are developing over 130 million to develop the technology through innovation support with the aim of reducing its cost and so we will continue to look at the role that it can play. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i know that schools have to make the best use of their resources. that's why i was shock today learn that schools in the northwest are charged 27 billion pounds on water charges, would prime minister agree with me that government make representations to change the bounding guidance that
schools are committed -- considered community assets while classified in the same way as big business? >> can i first of all commend my honorable friend and others in this house who play a rule in school government. she's right that schools need to think carefully how they are using resources. we are actually looking at the guidance to water companies in relation to how they can deal with schools and whether they are looking at schools and using more rates in relation to schools. >> thank you very much, mr. speaker. the prime minister may be aware of corruption and fraud in northern ireland, can the prime minister confirm what agencies will be investigating those and crime agency will be involved and report publicly and published? >> i have to say to the honorable gentleman on the
specific issue that he has raised and will come back on details on that as he know it is national crime agency operates in northern ireland, and it will be necessary issues where they are being looked at into but i will write detail answer to his question. >> will the prime minister give support as they reach a crucial stage of negotiations which we hope will deliver a noashed settlement for a free and united cypress? >> yes, i'm happy to join my right honorable friend in what she said. i think it's important, i think everybody across this house will wish and hope they have a successful conclusion. >> lisa. >> it's been two years since the prime minister set child abuse inquiry. it's up to fourth chair and last
week the outgoing chair said unmanageable. will she insist that she comes before the house, surely child abuse deserve an explanation. >> first of all, on the process that she has raised with me, it's not for the prime minister to insist who attends for the committee of this house, i understand they have been invited to attend committee. all i will say on child abuse issue, she and i share, many honorable members, a desire to see these issues of appalling crimes of child abuse being properly looked into, it's important that the inquiry, the truth project, many aspects of this which are already in place and operating and i'm very pleased that alexis has taken on the role, she would do this work
extremely well and we would have answers to questions that so many have been asking for too long. >> thank you, mr. speaker. child exploitation is an issue that affect many communities, will she agree to an independent review of child sexual exploitation? >> i think my honorable friend has just shown the cross-party concern that there is on this issue of child abuse and child sexual exploitation. it is absolutely right what my honorable friend said that we are able to look at the abuses in the past and crimes in the past, important lesson that is we need to learn from that as to why institutions that are supposed to protect children fail today protect children. it's for the authorities to look at specifically how they wish to address these issues, but i'm sure she wants to take that up.
>> diana johnson. >> following the successful independent panels, will the prime minister look at review of the biggest treatment of the nhs, the scandal, still waiting for answers years on? >> the honorable lady raises an important point in relation to contaminated blood. i will take the point she has made and consider it. obviously she will know that the reasons and background which led to the independent panel that i recognized the concern that people have about contaminated flood and will consider the points that she has made. >> mr. speaker. the prime minister would be aware of coverage regarding a report to be published dye casey, -- casey, such as
christmas being threatened from political correctness of officials. will the prime minister take this opportunity to send a loud and clear message that the best way to secure a harmomiuos society, to respect minority traditions, but also that b officials respect views and traditions of mainstream britain and that means -- [shouting] >> that means christmas -- [shouting] >> do i -- i do agree with my honorable friend. it's an important piece of work. i will simply join him in saying this, that what we want to see
in our society is tolerance and understanding but we also -- we want majority communities to be able to recognize and stand up for their traditions but we also want to be able to stand up for our traditions generally as well and that includes christmas. >> thank you, mr. speaker. would the prime minister look very carefully at the calls from the british leg own for new questions to be added to the next to meet better needs of the personnel, armed forces and veterans and their families. would she look carefully at the distribution of funding so that there is equitable funding across all regions and countries of the united kingdom? >> i am please that had it was this government that introduce it had military covenant and recognized the importance of that -- those serving in armed
forces and important veterans in armed forces. that will certainly be looked at . >> does she agree that the cooperation between russia and the united states in respect to the letter sent interest to develop link with russia and many more problems in that region? >> my honorable friend is right that the agreement that has been reached between russia and united states about syria is an important agreement and i think everybody in this house want to see that working being put into practice and actually working on the ground. i would say that there has been a number of occasions where we seem what appears to be step
forward and sadly it hasn't been possible to implement them. i hope this would be different and mark important step. in relation to russia, i think we should have no doubt about the relationship we should have with russia, it's not a business relationship as usual. i made that clear when i was responding on the report and we should continue with that position. >> george howard. >> the prime minister kennedy and crime commission in commending the bravery, tremendous bravery of the police officers involved in the stabbing incident in my constituency and police being asked to do more and more with
fewer and fewer resources? >> well, once again, i join the hon -- honorable gentleman, i think if i said earlier, our police officers brave i will go where others wouldn't go in order to protect the public. they do so much in the line of duty but also when they're off duty swell, they're prepared to go and face danger in order to protect us. on the issue of resources, i would simply remind him that we have protected police budget over the period of the comprehensive review spending settlement. >> order.
[inaudible conversations] >> here on c-span we will leave the british house of commons as members move onto other business. you've been watching prime minister's question time aired live on wednesday at 7:00 a.m. eastern when parliament is in session. you can see the session sunday nights on c-span. and for more information go to c-span.org and click on series to view every program that we've aired from the british house of commons since october of 1989 and we invite your comments about prime minister's questions via twitter using #pmq.
c-span brought to you as a publish service as cable or satellite provider. >> look at immigration policy under the obama administration. [inaudible conversations] >> good afternoon, i'm a professor at georgetown law and i want to thank again my wonderful colleagues from mpi for organizing the extraordinary sessions, we will continue to learn now about refugee resettlement issues. you heard actually our keynoters. if you aren't familiar with the
it's greater than ever. so we have a great panel to discuss these issues. to my immediate right is anna's greene, director at the international rescue committee. she will be talking about what is going on at the state level for resettlement agencies and other players, all the stakeholders at the local level because that is where a lot of the concerns are being raised. two and a spray is my friend and colleague, trained to come out my former dean who hired me here. thank you. also the high commissioner for refugees and no visiting professor at columbia law school. alex is going to be tabbed about this from a global perspective of someone who's been familiar with refugee resettlement program for a long time. we will talk about the
implications of what is going on right now. to his right is professor kevin fandl at the temple university. kevin has written a thoughtful legal analysis of the challenge the actual legal challenges that states have made to the federal government over their concerns of refugees in a state with the principal ones. i felt we would start with cap and if you would lay out exactly what those concerns are, how the issues are raised and gave you his 10 minute submarine of those challenges. and then move it to anna and finally to alex. kevin. >> thank you, andy for the invitation. good afternoon, everyone. the inspiration for the article
i wrote with a number of lawsuits that states have begun the number of injections in light of what happened in november of 2015. most of you hopefully recall there was a terrorist attack in areas, subsequent attack thereafter in belgium and in the terrorist attack, one of the attackers who was killed in the raid, a passport was found on him this link to a refugee from syria. net despite the fact that later on the passport was proven to be false, the reverberations of the possibility that a refugee came into europe and committed a terrorist act were severe. these of course reverberated across europe, across a lot of countries to rethink whether they wanted to allow refugees at all for the region. but they also reverberated
across the atlantic ocean to the united states for 31 state governors, the vast majority of republicans immediately raised this issue is a public policy issue. this is something the governor is particularly interested in selling to their people, that we should rethink whether we want to allow refugees coming in from syria. we don't want parents to have been here in the united states. so this concern, a terrorist and refugee closing in the objection states are raising got me thinking what type of authority to the states have? what ability to pay half to check to the placement of refugees that have been lawfully admitted by the federal government. one thing and he didn't mention that you see in my bio i spent many years working at the department of homeland security, most recently for ice, so my colleagues are here speaking. i got to see a lot of immigration policy from her and
then i came to understand well the federal perspective on immigration. what i didn't completely understand this is a perspective and that is what led me to dig deep into the research. let's start with the recent news that just this month we admitted at 10,000 refugees in syria. that is achieving the goal of a president obama has set forth to bring in 10,000 refugees in 2016. this is a far cry from what many other countries have done. this is very modest and night of what we've done in the past to admit groups of refugees. and he mentioned the refugee act , which largely coordinated with our admittance of the chinese, vietnamese and individuals following the vietnam conflict. we could look of a narrow port crisis in the 1980s who
admitted about 100,000 cuban refugees. typically what's happened over time is when the united states has been somehow directly or indirectly involved in causing the conflict, we tend to feel somewhat responsible for protecting refugees. syria has been different. our commitment has been much lower in the past situation and then of course we are under no obligation to admit and a number of refugees or obligation is to not return them to the conflict once they've admitted them. we do tend to admit it was an hundred thousand on average per year from various places around the world. why not from syria? why not from iraq or they have significant involvement with a lot of refugees he comes a political question. the states are concerned about these particular individuals being in their communities.
then they focus for a moment and let the federal government is doing to try to ensure that states are protected against potential terrorists and refugees clothing. first is the federal refugee program which has a screening process that allows us for almost two years to go through an extensive background check. a number of different agencies, and a number of reviews and interviews before the refugee is admitted into the country. that is much different than the the background of valuation for other immigrants, nonimmigrant tourists coming to the united states. in my opinion, there's a much more significant risk that you would find that potential terrorists and refugee clothing. certainly not for the refugee program which is much more rigorous. it's a refugee is approved by the office of refugee comedy
hour are both nk medicaid -- communicate to try to find an appropriate place for the refugee to this. this has gone on farewell for almost 40 years now. but syrian refugees, it has been particularly amenable because we have 150,000 former refugees are you living here in the united states around the world. a large portion in texas in hearing the 90s date -- northeast. matching up with communities or family members becomes a much easier process that facilitates the integration and assimilation of these individuals. this program is completely federal. throughout that time since the late 19th century the supreme court has been very clear that immigration throughout the 50 years a number of states try to
get involved and the supreme court knocks them down. i go through a full case analysis in my article. this is a little bit different because here we have refugees being brought in by the government, background checks by the government and the decision on where to place them made by the federal government. the interactions are all occurring at the state level. the interaction between the public schools, public hospitals, public libraries to the assist of limited government. the simulation program. all the integration is happening in the state and local communities. obviously, this is called consternation and concern in the local communities. the question becomes, what can the states do? what opportunities do you have to request information to decide if they would like, to be
selective about the refugees that are going to live in their communities. the answer is pretty simple. but they have very little opportunity to make those types of demand on the federal government. but they do have an opportunity to court made. i will just let you know this is but the act says the federal government with states concerning the sponsorship process and the distribution of refugees before their placement in those states and localities. the burden is falling on the states of the coordination is required. as well, the federal government will reimburse states and localities for costs associated with the placement of refugees and their communities. it seems to be working out very well. they don't want consultation. they want the ability to say if you can't guarantee is that the refugee is not a security risk,
we don't want them placed here. this is where crosses the line. a lot of strategies for attempted. i'll mention a couple year. first there were some bills introduced in the senate and the house. the senate will introduced by ted cruz last year immediately after the terrorist attacks would allow a state governor to refuse to refugee if in their sole discretion of our failed to give adequate assurances that pose no security risk. so the office of refugee resettlement is being asked to affirm that this individual will never commit a terrorist act. obviously it's a pretty high for and they're not going to do such a thing. the house took up a similar bill. the senate bill i should mention is still in committee and the judiciary committee. the house bill verdi have some
results here. the american security against foreign enemy act. this one would increase the already rigorous background checks specifically on iraqi and syrian refugees. and they would require that orr, but the head of dhs, department of homeland security, fbi, director of national intelligence and others to certify that the refugee poses no risk. this one passed overwhelmingly in the house. largely republican and some democratic support is filed but a provisionally failed in the senate and the president has threatened to veto it anyway, so again this is relatively dead. but there has been another approach states have taken that show probably here my co-panelists referred to and that is simply to sue the federal government. texas brought the lawsuit in
november 2015, demanding more information about refugees that were going to be placed in texas communities. again, orr already consults with texas prior to the placement of any refugees are, the texas funky solar background information. they want to know much right detail than orr was willing to give. in this case, the district court judge dismisses saying that terrorists could have infiltrated this theory and refugees and could commit acts of terrorism in texas, largely speculative hearsay. texas had unfounded fear of terrorist attacks from these refugees. not to be one up, à la, brought their suit after texas dates of president obama violated the 1980 refugee act by failing to control properly states about refugee placement. the governor refused to accept
any refugees until full background checks were provided for each individual coming to the states. this case after the texas case was dismissed, but in alabama they filed an appeal at the 11th circuit and that was just over a week ago. additionally, tennessee passed senate resolution 467 and this would allow the general assembly to sue the president and an interesting twist here, in violation of the 10th amendment, states rights. the georgetown lawsuit here, probably studied the sinner, not classes. this piece is a bit of a unique approach. the tennessee attorney general who would have normally brought the case said probably which are common law professor is telling you. there's really no merit to make a challenge under the 10th amendment to say the federal government is abusing this power to allow refugees into the country and place